Supershield Ltd v Siemens Building Technologies FE Ltd

Supershield Ltd v Siemens Building Technologies FE Ltd

Supershield's subcontract included installation and adjustment of the ball valve as part of the sprinkler system; the factual finding that Supershield installed the ball valve was not erroneous; Siemens' settlement was reasonable and the loss was not too remote given the scope of contractual responsibility.

Parties
Appellant: Supershield Limited; Respondent: Siemens Building Technologies FE Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Contract Interpretation, Remoteness of Damages, Causation, Settlement Reasonableness
Contract Law Construction Law Contract Interpretation Remoteness of Damages Causation Settlement Reasonableness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Supershield Limited

Appellant

Siemens Building Technologies FE Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Supershield's subcontract included installation of the ball valve
  2. 2 Whether Supershield installed the ball valve
  3. 3 Whether Siemens' settlement of claims was reasonable and recoverable from Supershield

Ratio Decidendi

Supershield's subcontract included installation and adjustment of the ball valve as part of the sprinkler system; the factual finding that Supershield installed the ball valve was not erroneous; Siemens' settlement was reasonable and the loss was not too remote given the scope of contractual responsibility.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for Siemens on its Part 20 claim against Supershield for the settlement amount and interest.
  • Supershield's appeal is dismissed.